Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Gaming Patents — Where They're Going

Posted by Soulskill on from the is-it-disneyworld dept.

An anonymous reader writes "BNET looked at some patents which suggest that Microsoft might be thinking about an integrated game console/set-top box. Quoting: 'Patent 20080167128 is for watching television on a game console, while patent 20080167127 covers switching a gaming console between various media, including television, video, music, and games, and even using the console as a set-top box. Clearly Microsoft has been interested in controlling the living room, and combining media, gaming, and set-top functions in a single device would make a great deal of sense.' There are also hints of mobile gaming that support the current round of rumors about a combination Xbox-Zune. "

69 comments

  1. IP TV by Pulse_Instance · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wasn't Microsoft working on this a while ago. There were going to add IP-TV functionality with a DVR to the 360. I was really looking forward to it but as far as I remember it was never actually released.

    1. Re:IP TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they have a STB client for their Mediaroom IPTV product. It's the system that's used for AT&T's U-verse IPTV system, and by BT. It's actually just a port of the same code that's used in their normal STB's.

      I'm not sure if anyone has actually launched it, though...

    2. Re:IP TV by AnalPerfume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Microsoft, Sony & Apple have all eye'd the sitting room as the next battleground for media domination and control. They know people use their TV's for more and more functions, not unlike a web browser which started life as a simple application but has now grown to be multi-functioned and used to interact with more and more things.

      Sony and Microsoft have their consoles able to connect to the net, play DVDs etc. They know that if they can get the trojan horse in the home, they can sell peripherals designed for that unit, and know that if it breaks in a couple of years the customer has already invested a fortune in peripherals that they will most likely replace like-for-like. All three want to be the COMPLETE solution from end to end, rather than just part of a heterogeneous solution. They will use vendor lock-in, proprietary formats, DRM etc to ensure that despite the barriers their customers will face having to deal with it all, when all they want is a system to easily plug together and just work.

      It's staggering that Microsoft would get a patent on something which seems blatantly obvious as the next feature on a TV based console. It's no surprise that they applied for it however.

  2. The End is Nigh! by buttfscking · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think the Xbox/Zune crossover project was mentioned somewhere in Revelations...

    1. Re:The End is Nigh! by erick99 · · Score: 1

      Is that for real?

      --
      http://www.busyweather.com/
    2. Re:The End is Nigh! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      And we are all going to pay Microsoft Tax for every device we own, in all from microwave ovens to calculators.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  3. Xbox 360 MCE by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anybody else thinking of Media Center Edition? While the required hardware implementation for the PC edition left somewhat to be desired (those required satellite and cable cards still give me nightmares), the Xbox 360 might skip a lot of the more complicated initial setup for a far more user-friendly experience. Or so you would think, in theory.

  4. Sony has prior art. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    PSX.

    PSX was the internal codename for the playstation, it was also the name of a DVR/Music/Movie/Set Top Box/PS2 combo in Japan for Satellite services.

    This is going to be a little interesting.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Sony has prior art. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony might have prior art. I also think, that people at Sony thought that patenting such thing would be ridiculous. I think that ideas presented in the two mentioned papers are obvious. Patents for making all-in-one devices are ridiculous. An average tech savy teenager could have produced such patent claim. The only thing stopping him from doing that is lack of funds, as patenting is an expensive process.

    2. Re:Sony has prior art. by SlashWombat · · Score: 1

      It really comes down to "when is a Gaming Console not a computer?" ... Once you can use the gaming console to browse the web (say) you could claim that the device is not purely just a gaming console. This patent should never have been granted in the first place ... and would tumble given the slightest challenge.

    3. Re:Sony has prior art. by tepples · · Score: 1

      It really comes down to "when is a Gaming Console not a computer?"

      Once a device is officially user-programmable, then it's a computer. This already applies to the PLAYSTATION 3; it would apply to the Xbox 360 if Creators Club had a lifetime subscription instead of an annual subscription.

  5. Been there, done that by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I already did that on the original xbox

    --
    IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    1. Re:Been there, done that by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Not only that.. but there has been a mythtv frontend for the Xbox for almost 10 years.

      Shouldn't that count for something in terms of prior art?

      Clearly Microsoft was not the first one to think about watching TV and switching between games and different types of media on a game console / general purpose computing platform.

  6. Easier target candidate by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Putting fences all around Imaginationland. They could have no plan to build it, but want to make sure nobody else will.

  7. combination Xbox-Zune by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    > combination Xbox-Zune

    Who would want a brown game console that looks like a turd ?

  8. Patenting away the competition by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Troll

    I bet the idea is, Zune would have been a success if it wasn't for all the other (better) MP3-players out there. Especially IPods.

    Hey, MS? Just because there is no alternative, people still won't buy crap. That only works in markets you have cornered. Everywhere else, you gotta make what people want or they just won't buy it.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Patenting away the competition by Afforess · · Score: 1

      The Zune isn't/wasn't a bad device, in fact it had features that Ipods lacked for many years. It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.

      --
      If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
    2. Re:Patenting away the competition by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      The Zune isn't/wasn't a bad device, in fact it had features that Ipods lacked for many years.

      But, were they features people actually wanted, or just some extra bells and whistles that only a few people will ever need, use, or even know about? I don't think in the years I've owned iPods I've ever felt there were features I wish it had.

      It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.

      Geek-cool or cool-people cool? Because, quite frankly, they're very different.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Patenting away the competition by Afforess · · Score: 2
      I don't know about you, but the wireless syncing and game support was much better than the Ipod's until the touch came out. Those were great features, but even the best products fail with terrible ads and marketing.

      It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.

      Geek-cool or cool-people cool? Because, quite frankly, they're very different.

      Don't hurt yourself thinking about this question, I realize it's very difficult.

      --
      If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
    4. Re:Patenting away the competition by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but the wireless syncing and game support was much better than the Ipod's until the touch came out.

      *shrug* If you think those are useful, glad you liked them. I have no interest in playing games on my music player, or my phone. :-P

      "Geek-cool or cool-people cool? Because, quite frankly, they're very different."

      Don't hurt yourself thinking about this question, I realize it's very difficult.

      No, seriously. Because the Zune never matched the cool factor of the iPod. Outside of the hardcore MS fanboi, most people showed no interest in it whatsoever.

      I mean, clearly this guy thought it was "cool", but again, I don't think that's what most people when they think of "cool". :-P

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Patenting away the competition by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      But, were they features people actually wanted, or just some extra bells and whistles that only a few people will ever need, use, or even know about? I don't think in the years I've owned iPods I've ever felt there were features I wish it had.

      I bought an 80-GB Zune because:

      1) The Zune software is FAR superior to iTunes. My Zune actually broke (the screen cracked) a few months ago, but I'm still using the Zune software to manage my collection-- iTunes is only used for my iPhone.

      2) The Zune has an FM radio and the iPod doesn't.

      Other than those two points, the Zune was on-par with the iPod Video I had before. Both devices play music and MP4 files fine.

      --
      Comment of the year
    6. Re:Patenting away the competition by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      The main problem with the Zune is that it was so pathetically late that all anyone could think of is "Oh look, an iPod clone made by MS that looks... brown". Thats what the public thought of it, had the Zune came out earlier it might have had a chance, but I would have to say that anyone looking at a Zune would have to think first that its an iPod clone. Thats what killed it.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    7. Re:Patenting away the competition by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      I dont think that wireless syncing is a killer feature for a mp3 player.

      Most people wouldnt be interested in it.

    8. Re:Patenting away the competition by A12m0v · · Score: 1

      squirting is one feature idon't want

      except in my gf

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    9. Re:Patenting away the competition by A12m0v · · Score: 1

      Zune guy is no more
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBbOBc-L720

      I don't know if he went back to Zune-ism, since then.

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  9. I'd simply ask them what they did with it? by crovira · · Score: 1

    I think patent trolls could be easily taken care of if they had to put up or shut up.

    If you've actually built a device with the idea then I'd have to pay, if not, screw you.

    I could patent cabling to devices together, would that get me the rights to shake down everybody who'd ever wired two pieces of crap together?

    I think not.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:I'd simply ask them what they did with it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think you're the first person to come up with that idea? Seasoned patent attorneys, who have to know and understand not only the law, but also the engineering, the science, and the economics behind all this, have thought of it and rejected it. Well, at least the extreme variant you propose.

      The reason? In your attempt to take down the big players, you're actually causing the little guy inventing on a small budget incredible harm. Think of the poor guy with a big idea and no budget.

      As for your last argument ... what? You most certainly could not patent cabling two devices together. Way to build a retarded straw man argument.

  10. including television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Some years ago MS had a survey done that found that in most homes the computer and the TV were in the same room in the house. The conclusion they came to was that people wanted to watch TV on their computer.

    No!, Wrong!, people didn't have 22 room mansions with separate computer labs and home theatres. They have their stuff in one room because they only have one room, or one living room.

    The idea of a combination TV/computer/gaming/VCR is also based on everyone having their own computer, or probably several, and not having to share. Personally I would dislike having combiation machines, I want separate single function devices, then I can watch TV while working on the computer. I don't play games.

    1. Re:including television by Afforess · · Score: 1

      Or you could buy two monitors, watch TV on one, play on the other.

      --
      If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
    2. Re:including television by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Or you could buy two monitors, watch TV on one, play on the other.

      Why stop at two? I've always wanted one of those big wall-o-monitor dealios you see on TV. :-P

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:including television by msclrhd · · Score: 1

      Sarah: "Mum, why can't I watch TV?"
      Mum: "Well, the TV/Computer/Game Console is broken."

      or:

      Sarah: "I want to watch TV."
      David: "I want to play Halo 10."
      Mum: "Sorry, but I'm using the TV/Computer/Gaming Console at the moment to write up my report."

  11. Actually just applications by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These are actually just published applications, not patents (you can tell because the number starts with the publication year, whereas patent numbers are just serial numbers in increasing order roughly by date of issuance).

    What's interesting is that the first one linked is specifically limited to a game console, while the second one sounds as though a MythTV box with MythGame/MAME would read on most, if not all, of the claims (whether under anticipation or obviousness depends on whether you consider a MythTV box with MythGame to be a game console).

    1. Re:Actually just applications by Znork · · Score: 1

      whether under anticipation or obviousness depends on whether you consider a MythTV box with MythGame to be a game console

      Of course, you've been able to run mythfrontend on an Xbox for many years, and I'd say the Xbox might qualify as a game console. Maybe that's what they're trying to get around by explicitly stating something about the dashboards 'nativeness' to the console.

      I cant see anything that doesn't have at least one, if not two decades of prior art, and/or isn't obvious to anyone who hasn't been living in a cave since before the internet.

      Do they actually pay people to write these things, or have they written a script that does it?

    2. Re:Actually just applications by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      They never really define "native", though, so one could say that as long as the code is written as "native" for the processor (i.e., it's compiled into directly machine-executable code and not running on a Java VM or something like that), then it's "native".

  12. Self Preservation by Dega704 · · Score: 1

    I suppose MS wants another monopolized industry to fall back on if Keith Curtis' theories turn out to be right.

  13. Prior art everywhere by DavoMan · · Score: 3, Informative

    How can you award a patent for something so ambiguous?

    Dude I think a 'multimedia PC' (computer with CDROM or one that can play video) from the 1990's is enough to qualify as prior art here.

    Furthermore what about the old computers that plugged into the TV? They were a do-everything device for the telly equipped with:
    * A media drive that handled music (cassette tape),
    * They downloaded new media (modem),
    * AND did video in various crazy analogue ways (tv tuner).

    --
    Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
    1. Re:Prior art everywhere by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      The patent title isn't the patent. It's a general description of what the invention does. You can have a dozen different patents for a device to make toast and marmalade. When you look into the patent, you'll see an abstract. This is still just a general description of how it works. The claims are a little more meaningful but really the invention is described in the description. If there's prior art for a device that works in that way, then it's invalid but it could be valid even if there's another application that does it in a different way.

    2. Re:Prior art everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just confusing. The claims are pretty much everything. They define the metes and bounds of the patent. You can throw in all sorts of unpatentable subject matter into the specification and it doesn't matter -- it's there to provide support for what you're actually claiming. The specification often helps guide interpretation of the claims, and in the case of means-plus- or step-plus-function claims actually limits the claims to embodiments found in the specification, but the claims are what you need to read.

  14. invention vs innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When America stopped Inventing and started Innovating was the beginning of the decline. When Bell created the telephone it was an Invention. When the RIAA finds a new way to sue people its an Innovation. Creating a new lifsaving medication, Invention. Offering crippled versions of Windows at different price points, Innovation.

    Innovation is a term lawers and marketing goons use to glorify their often nauseating and sometimes unethical practices.

    Regarding the article. It's not an invention with a product in mind. It's ammunition for their arsenal of potential patent litigation intended to coerce compliance from competitors. In a word, an innovation. Not news, move along.

    1. Re:invention vs innovation by AnalPerfume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wonder how much it'd knock off US multi-nationals stock prices if the rest of the world decided overnight that patents were a bad idea and scraped them altogether, wiping all existing patents into oblivion. How many large US companies rely on their patents to control their markets, or bully competitors? If their patent portfolio is wiped out in every other area except the US, what happens?

      This is a hypothetical nightmare for some patent trolls which they will lobby tooth and nail to ensure never comes to pass.

    2. Re:invention vs innovation by Afforess · · Score: 1

      There is some support for your argument in history. The X-Ray machine, for example, was never patented. This allowed the device to be made easily and in great quantities and allowed for the widespread adoption of it.

      --
      If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
    3. Re:invention vs innovation by psicop · · Score: 1

      So THAT's why it costs several thousand dollars to use free technology and it's related invented technologies...

    4. Re:invention vs innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno about that. Edison's lightbulb was an innovation on a previous design, as was Bell's telephone.

  15. Epilepsy warning by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that if they get a flurry of pop ups like IE used to do, that it'll be flicking channels so fast that it works like a strobe light on epilepsy sufferers?

  16. Here we go: by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 2, Funny

    You mean they're gonna start supporting XBMC?

    --
    Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
  17. Huh? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, they're either trying to patent the general-purpose computer, or they're trying to say that merging your home theatre into one single component is a unique invention.

    I mean, you've been able to watch TV, movies, play music, and play games on a Mac for, what, 10+ years now? And you can easily make a PC do all of this as well (most of it right out of the box). And by changing the settings on my amplifier, I can choose between music, movies, video games, and the radio.

    All they're doing is taking functionality which has been available individually, as well as already integrated into the function of a computer, and adding one more thing -- being a gaming console. None of these sound like they should be patentable -- you can't take something people do all of the time, and patent the idea of doing it all in one box. That makes no sense to me.

    Have patents really devolved to "take what we can already do, put it in a box that also plays video games" and have that somehow be an innovation??

    I would argue that the entire computer industry (Microsoft included) has produced enough prior art as to seemingly completely invalidate this entire patent.

    Cheers

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Huh? by wjh31 · · Score: 1

      well i guess it's slightly better than add a clock

    2. Re:Huh? by Salsaman · · Score: 1

      Have patents really devolved to "take what we can already do, put it in a box that also plays video games" and have that somehow be an innovation??

      Yes.

  18. Prior Art by Afforess · · Score: 1

    patent 20080167127 covers switching a gaming console between various media, including television, video, music, and games

    Wow, that sounds just like a remote control.

    --
    If our elected representatives no longer represent us, do we still live in a Democracy?
  19. Not a fan of combo devices by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    It's only my opinion, obviously - but I've always felt that combo devices may be adequate in what they do, never do any one thing really well. Printer/Fax/Copiers, phone/cameras, etc. just don't seem to excel. Plus there's the obvious issue with having to replace all functions when any single one stops working - like those old TV/VCR combos.

    In this specific instance, I wouldn't personally think Microsoft to be capable of designing a slick enough TV recording system (yes I've seen Media PCs) for this to be attractive to anyone that's not already an X-Box fan. Maybe that's the only audience they're caring about in this instance, but Microsoft generally seems to want to own the world - however they don't do nearly as well getting into markets where they don't have leverage from their Windows quasi-monopoly.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Not a fan of combo devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah aside from a modded xbox which was an awesome combo device.

  20. Gaming console rented as set top box by dvorakhound · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If MS gives the xbox cable hosting capabilities, and partners with a cable provider like Comcast so that they offer the Xbox as the rent-a-cable-box solution, they would make an absolute killing.

    --
    Don't agree with me? Let's settle it on the battle field: http://dvorakhound.mybrute.com/
    1. Re:Gaming console rented as set top box by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      The return rate would probably end up being too high. Even though MS /finally/ fixed the RRoD in newer consoles doesn't mean that it would work for a cable box. Most people don't mind being without a 360 for a week or two, on the other hand the masses would be quite ticked off at MS or the cable company if they couldn't watch TV for a week.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  21. Patents suck by Lord+Lode · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's official. If you can patent these things, patents have become truly useless and sucky. Devices that are both TV and gaming device are so old. Even cellular phones do it. Oh and PC's of course. Useless. Lawyers are truly, really, degrading human progress.

    1. Re:Patents suck by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > If you can patent these things, patents have become truly useless and sucky.

      These aren't patents. They are patent applications.

      > Devices that are both TV and gaming device are so old. Even cellular phones do it. Oh
      > and PC's of course.

      Did you read the claims? If not you have no idea what they are trying to patent.

      > Lawyers are truly, really, degrading human progress.

      It's the politicians that make the laws, not the lawyers.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Patents suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Lawyers are truly, really, degrading human progress.

      It's the politicians that make the laws, not the lawyers.

      In the USA, many, if not most, politicians are lawyers or were lawyers at some point in time.

  22. Watching tv on a console? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    There were tv addons for existing games consoles years ago... I believe the sega genesis had one available for it, and the ps3 certainly does.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  23. Prior Art ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    It's staggering that Microsoft would get a patent on something which seems blatantly obvious as the next feature on a TV based console. It's no surprise that they applied for it however.

    Obvious, indeed. Isn't there already a ton of such attempt at multi-functional devices already ?

    Countless of do-it-yourself, small form factor PCs sitting under the TV set and featuring, TV reception, DVR functions, multimedia player, and console emulators ?
    The patent was only filed in 2007. Whereas the mini-ITX format which spawned so much of these home theater PCs dates back 2001.

    And building multi-function boxes has so much been a hot topic, that in 2002, a whole 5 years before Microsoft even files a patent, MythTV was named so, because of the "mythical convergence box" able to play TV, browse web, check e-mails, and play games, that everyone was raving about back then. Half a decade before Microsoft even files patents to put TV into an XBox, people were already making such hybrids. (Well except obviously MythGame was initially more about launching Mame/Mess and similar old school games rather than Xbox games as those weren't emulated back then).

    From a purely "let's find the oldest prior art" point of view :
    - Xbox Media Player and its successor Xbox Media Center and MythTV were all already functioning as "get other medias and TV on your XBox" several years before microsoft even thinks to file a patent for this specific stuff.
    - the Nuon platform (started in 1999) was specifically designed to be an official hybrid gaming/movie platform
    - Nuon was very probably an attempt at something nice and organised, after numerous not-really-licensed chinese and korean no-name CD or DVD players that featured MegaDrive/Genesis and/or NES emulators for last couple of years of the 90s.
    - Consoles from the previous generation as the PlayStation 2 (2000) and the XBox (2001) have been designed to have hybrid DVD-player functionality, either built-in or after paying for an accessory thanks to asinine licensing.
    - Consoles from even older or in-between generations like the Playstation (1994), the Saturn (1995) and the Dreamcast (1998) were designed to be able to play VideoCD and SuperVCD either built-in or with an additional co-processor in the case of Saturn. The DC was also designed from the start to be able to check emails and browse the web.
    - Sega's GameGear was designed to also work as a portable TV set (with a special cartridge) and Nintendo launched a similar cartridge (ok, the Gameboy's was for FM radio, not for TV, but it's still converging several media into 1 device)
    - The consoles which probably spawned all this "combine a console and a media player in the same box" mania : the Pioneer Laser Active. A device that plays LaserDiscs, CDs, but also Megadrive & Mega CD games, and even its own Mega LaserDisc games, and NEC and NEC-CD games (depending on whether the Sega or NEC module was plugged in). And the CD-i playing both movies (although requiring an additional co-processors) and its own format of games.

    I think not only the patent is obvious, but there's plenty of prior art in the hacking community to just destroy the patent into oblivion.

    1. Re:Prior Art ? by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

      I noticed a mistake in my original post, they are looking at patents in these areas, they haven't gotten them....yet. You're right though, there is plenty of prior art on this one. Microsoft did try to patent sudo which they didn't invent and don't use just to extract money from FOSS projects. They tried to patent ODF in some countries despite trying to kill it through the ISO then from within the ODF board itself. This seems like vintage Microsoft to me. They won't change.

  24. They are going to be jerks like with OS market? by lanner · · Score: 1

    Hm, let's see... they are going to be raving chair-throwing anti-competitive ass-holes like the OS market? What else would you possibly expect? Why would they be any different? They see a market that they can take over, so they go for it.

  25. Nothing new here. Move on. by kriston · · Score: 1

    There's nothing new here. The UltimateTV folks are working on XBOX360 to take over where the PS3 left off: make an affordable "everything" machine for your TV. Microsoft has a golden opportunity to truly achieve where Sony horribly failed.

    --

    Kriston

  26. Prior art.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can order it here right now (it has composite output, so you can plug on your TV):

    http://www.extra.com.br/DetalheProduto.aspx?codProduto=5379743&codCategoria=CatSomSomAutomotivo&utm_source=Virid&utm_medium=E-mail-MKT&utm_content=DVD-Player&utm_campaign=Dia-telefonia

  27. How to copy any game cd dvd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    game copy software - copy any wii game cd dvd, copy xbox360 games, copy psp games, copy ps2 game, ps3 game, pc game --- http://game-copy-software.sharewareguides.com/ iphone ringtone maker - make your own iphone ringtones, how to make iphone ringtones. ----http://iphone-ringtone-maker.sharewareguides.com/ nintendo ds dpg converter - convert all popular format videos and audios to dpg for NDS or to nintendo ds supported format --- http://nds-dpg-converter.sharewareguides.com/ mac users can surf http://mac.sharewareguides.com/

  28. What a foolish endear for Microsoft to pursue by johncandale · · Score: 1

    What a foolish endear for Microsoft to pursue. The Gaming console market is not the set-top box market, not yet. The reason the ps3 failed and bankrupted Sony Computer Entertainment division is because they added $150 dollars worth of development costs and hardware to each unit to try to be more then a game console. Most gamers don't care, and everyone else doesn't want to buy a game machine for it's add-on uses.
    I can see the thinking, expand on the 360 market, add new features, use what you already have to expand your market share in other areas. The truth is, there is no real brand loyalties when the next generation comes. The ps2 to ps3 gap is proof of that.

  29. Have a PC? No split-screen for you. by tepples · · Score: 1

    The idea of a combination TV/computer/gaming/VCR is also based on everyone having their own computer, or probably several, and not having to share.

    That's the mindset that PC game publishers appear to work from. Often, the PC version of a video game won't have a split- or otherwise shared-screen option for HTPC owners even if the console versions have it. More often, party games just don't get ported to PC at all.

  30. fuck you, use you, scar you, break you by tepples · · Score: 1

    David: "I want to play Halo 10."
    Mum: "Sorry, but I'm using the TV/Computer/Gaming Console"

    Why would Mum even let David listen to Further Down the Spiral by Nine Inch Nails?

  31. Fits my purchase policy by Eric+Elliott · · Score: 1

    Apple, Intel, Microsoft & Sony are already on my "No purchase" list, so these patents just validate my list. End over population, patent eating with tools.

  32. To avoid, sell a computer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The computer can do all these things, instead of selling a console, simply sell a computer with a console format. With this you will not need to pay royalties to Microsoft.